skierinvermont Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 My post had absolutely nothing to do with Global Warming Theory, Snowcover varies naturally over extended time periods, the end. What is your deal? Issue arises when the entire discussion topic is diverted off topic, not that AGW theory is forbidden outside the CC-forum, but this thread isn't the place for debates on the matter unless it has to do with snowcover on it's own. AGW theory and it's significance, measurable or not, is CC-forum talk. You claimed, and just did again, that the variation in sea ice is natural which is directly contradictory to AGW science and instigating debate on the issue which doesn't belong here. I'm not going to derail this any further so this is my last response to you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 You claimed, and just did again, that the variation in sea ice is natural which is directly contradictory to AGW science and instigating debate on the issue which doesn't belong here. I'm not going to derail this any further so this is my last response to you. Where did I claim anything like that? Again nothing I said had anything to do with global warming theory. Natural variations in snowcover happen all the time, is what I have been saying. I never said anything about sea ice or global warming. Calm down I'm not out to attack your opinions or insult believers in AGW theory. Snowcover varies naturally over extended periods of time, the end. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Well that will depend on what we see with the NAO, what you reference is a correlation to September/October NAO, SST's are altered by many factors including the NAO. Keep in mind the NAO not only has an effect on the SSTs, but also storm tracks that will determine snowfall in those areas......areas with more sunshine tend to see higher SST's, visa-verse with diminished sunlight, sunlight is a very big factor in where we see specific SST anomalies. Much of the NAO we've seen in 2009 & 2010 could very well be solar induced, in 2009 the upper atmsphere cooled and collapsed and while building back slowly we see with the weaker megnetic sun the wave-breaking up at the Stratospheric level seems altered. The more frequent -NAO in supressing storm track also tends to coincide with La Nina in the Pacific, though as is obvious the -NAO & alterations in wx-patterns during low solar activity results in Jet stream positioning oriented further southward, cloud cover over tropical regions increases in response as general weather patterns change, it all ties together. The very warm arctic SSTs this year and in several of the past 5 years have little to do with the NAO and much more to do with summer sea ice extent caused by the dipole anomaly, AO, global warming and the very low volume of sea ice remaining. When the ice melts early, it warms up more, regardless of the NAO. 2010 had SSTs far above average despite a -NAO. It makes some physical sense that the very warm SSTs left over from summer reduce snowfall in October. There is some correlation. I'm not saying I can prove it but you can't disprove it either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The very warm arctic SSTs this year and in several of the past 5 years have little to do with the NAO and much more to do with summer sea ice extent caused by the dipole anomaly, AO, and global warming. When the ice melts early, it warms up more. UGH dude.....you were correlating them to Eurasian snowcover (NAO is a much better correlation there is what I said)...cause of SST changes is Off-Topic. SST's in the general vicinity correlate well to the AMO phase, just go to NOAA/CPC site and select "AMO" in the ESRL division. Though there are several reasons for the change and you should exect a reverse as we build back MY ice as the BG rebuilds and the AMO cools. It makes some physical sense that the very warm SSTs left over from summer reduce snowfall in October. There is some correlation. I'm not saying I can prove it but you can't disprove it either. Not trying to "prove" or "disprove" anything, just that the NAO correlates better than SST's, see 2010. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 The very warm arctic SSTs this year and in several of the past 5 years have little to do with the NAO and much more to do with summer sea ice extent caused by the dipole anomaly, AO, global warming and the very low volume of sea ice remaining. When the ice melts early, it warms up more, regardless of the NAO. 2010 had SSTs far above average despite a -NAO. It makes some physical sense that the very warm SSTs left over from summer reduce snowfall in October. There is some correlation. I'm not saying I can prove it but you can't disprove it either. Arctic SSTs were considerably warmer in the 2000s than in the 1980s yet the snow cover increased. I'm not sure there is any correlation. Climo in the Eurasia snow cover region is really cold in October, so precipitation likely has much more to do with it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Arctic SSTs were considerably warmer in the 2000s than in the 1980s yet the snow cover increased. I'm not sure there is any correlation. Climo in the Eurasia snow cover region is really cold in October, so precipitation likely has much more to do with it. Yeah exactly SST's were very warm in 2010 yet snowcover was quite high, coinciding with the -NAO and asociated storm track configuration. As for sea ice there isn't any correlation there at all upon looking at it, that'll fluctuate over extended timscales apart from the NAO or Synoptical patterns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieOber Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 I can't wait until we can start the real snow cover thread in late September. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Y'know, I haven't actually started counting... But here (note that there is always a random error of about 20 pixels in the snow counts due to the white numbers at the bottom right): SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 266 Today: 282 One year ago today: 350 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1546 Today: 1559 One year ago today: 1695 SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 282 Today: 301 One year ago today: 351 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1559 Today: 1509 One year ago today: 1678 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Arctic SSTs were considerably warmer in the 2000s than in the 1980s yet the snow cover increased. I'm not sure there is any correlation. Climo in the Eurasia snow cover region is really cold in October, so precipitation likely has much more to do with it. Yes the 2000s were 'warm' but 2007 and 2011 are so much radically warmer than any other years in the 2000s. The 2000s as a whole (minus 2007 and 2011) bear much more resemblance to the 1980s than they do to 2007 and 2011 individually. Also, I believe it is very temperature limited as well as precip limited. It is the very beginning of the snow season.. prior to October almost none of the NH is cold enough for snow. By october, it is just cold enough to snow and widespread cold will increase the chances of cold in the marginal areas which are the areas that ultimately make or break the anomalies. In this map of the first two weeks of October 2007, you can see a lot of heat was being released from the arctic ocean. Cold was a limiting factor to snowfall, as the blues and purples (units Kelvin) were confined to Siberia Alaska and Greenland, providing little opportunity for snowfall in the rest of Russia or Europe. By the end of October, a good year would have plenty of snowcover outside of Siberia and Alaska over most of Russia and northern Europe. So I believe temperature is constraining. Had the arctic ocean not been releasing so much heat in October 2007, perhaps the cold air source would have been better and the cold would have been slightly more widespread, thus increasing the snowfall anomalies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ORH_wxman Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 Yes the 2000s were 'warm' but 2007 and 2011 are so much radically warmer than any other years in the 2000s. The 2000s as a whole (minus 2007 and 2011) bear much more resemblance to the 1980s than they do to 2007 and 2011 individually. That certainly doesn't mean it decreases snow cover ability in Eurasia in October. Its possible, but we are talking about a land mass here and not just along the coast where warmer SSTs might affect it. At any rate, until we see distinct snow cover decreases with warmer SSTs, this is really not much of a story IMHO. I think the precip patterns are much more responsible in a place that has the climo of Eurasia. Last year certainly didn't matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 That certainly doesn't mean it decreases snow cover ability in Eurasia in October. Its possible, but we are talking about a land mass here and not just along the coast where warmer SSTs might affect it. At any rate, until we see distinct snow cover decreases with warmer SSTs, this is really not much of a story IMHO. I think the precip patterns are much more responsible in a place that has the climo of Eurasia. Last year certainly didn't matter. Yes it is just an idea at this point with some anecdotal data supporting it. Even if the idea were correct it would likely still only be a lesser factor compared to where the blocking sets up. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tacoman25 Posted September 7, 2011 Share Posted September 7, 2011 That certainly doesn't mean it decreases snow cover ability in Eurasia in October. Its possible, but we are talking about a land mass here and not just along the coast where warmer SSTs might affect it. At any rate, until we see distinct snow cover decreases with warmer SSTs, this is really not much of a story IMHO. I think the precip patterns are much more responsible in a place that has the climo of Eurasia. Last year certainly didn't matter. I think it's pretty clear that the early snowcover in Eurasia is tied more closely to the NAO/AO than anything else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 8, 2011 Share Posted September 8, 2011 Big gains for this time of year... looks like it's starting up early again! (notice especially around 95 E longitude) SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 301 Today: 362 One year ago today: 326 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1509 Today: 1482 One year ago today: 1658 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Sorry for the late report. SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 362 Today: 357 One year ago today: 387 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1482 Today: 1487 One year ago today: 1643 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 If the 12z GFS has it's way expect some good snowcover gains. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 If the 12z GFS has it's way expect some good snowcover gains. Maps, please? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SoCoWx Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Climo says Arctic Sea Ice reaches it's Summer minimum late next week or early the following week. It should stablize thereafter and then start gradually growing again in the coming weeks. So we are very close now to more rapid snowcover growth. As well as ice refreeze. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstantWeatherMaps Posted September 9, 2011 Author Share Posted September 9, 2011 Maps, please? Just wait... there may be some maps for that in a few days Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 Just wait... there may be some maps for that in a few days Coolio! Props to you for starting this thread early and predicting what looks to be yet another insanely early start to the snow cover season... I saw the same thing and was actually going to start it on the 1st, but you beat me to it. Also, sorry for going OT, but would you mind adding Canada maps soon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 9, 2011 Share Posted September 9, 2011 SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 357 Today: 337 One year ago today: 397 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1487 Today: 1484 One year ago today: 1627 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
weathafella Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 Don't forget me.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 we currently have the largest negative anomaly for the date: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ellinwood Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 Imagine my disappointment when okie took my question seriously and is now posting daily pixel updates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JamieOber Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 Don't forget me.. You should start a new thread. Traditionally here this is your game, man. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InstantWeatherMaps Posted September 10, 2011 Author Share Posted September 10, 2011 You should start a new thread. Traditionally here this is your game, man. And exactly why is no one else able to start a thread on snow cover? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 we currently have the largest negative anomaly for the date: Although you're using a different dataset, I usually take the sea ice state into account and attempt to do a correction, albedo loss after losing all that MY Ice in 07/08 tends to put a dent in early season SC gains. The Arctic Ice pack is much more vunerable after losing the stable ice a few yrs ago, so it will be hard to make accurate early season predictions until/if we increase MY Ice since wx patterns can bully the ice pack much more easily. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 albedo loss after losing all that MY Ice in 07/08 tends to put a dent in early season SC gains. That's exactly what I suggested as a possibility a week ago and you objected Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BethesdaWX Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 That's exactly what I suggested as a possibility a week ago and you objected Can you quote that please? I'd never object that a Weaker/Smaller ice pack can affect early season gains (as in, SEP & 1st 1/2 of OCT). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
skierinvermont Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 As for sea ice there isn't any correlation there at all upon looking at it, Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
okie333 Posted September 10, 2011 Share Posted September 10, 2011 Imagine my disappointment when okie took my question seriously and is now posting daily pixel updates Funny that you would mention shortly before the HUGE GAINS IN SIBERIA AND ALASKA!!! SNOW PIXEL COUNTS (total white minus 8000 [approximate number of white pixels that are map lines and not snow]) Yesterday: 337 Today: 572 One year ago today: 428 ICE PIXEL COUNTS (total yellow) Yesterday: 1484 Today: 1443 One year ago today: 1634 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.